N.J. school reform must get teacher evaluation right

Aaron Houston/For The Star-LedgerTeachers union leaders, school superintendents, retired teachers, state officials, business leaders, school advocates and others testified in a more than three-hour hearing on the bill introduced last month by Sen. Teresa Ruiz (D-Essex), shown in this file photo.

By Bruce Taterka

Yes, teacher tenure needs reform, but state Sen. Teresa Ruiz’s bill places too much weight on the teacher evaluation system under development in New Jersey. Firing teachers based on two consecutive years of poor evaluations is not going to improve teacher effectiveness or student achievement.

The bill by Ruiz (D-Essex) would place high-stakes decisions on a teacher evaluation system that does not yet exist. We don’t know how effective or reliable the system will be when implemented. New teacher-evaluation systems in other states such as New York and Tennessee have shown there are tremendous challenges in getting teacher evaluation right.

By order of Gov. Chris Christie, teacher evaluation in New Jersey will be based 50 percent on student achievement (usually measured by test scores) and 50 percent on teacher practice (usually measured by classroom observations). However, New Jersey has standardized tests only for grades 3 to 8, in math and English. How will student achievement be measured in nontested grades and subjects such as history, science, art, etc.? Those questions have not yet been answered, and developing new tests or alternative assessments is going to be expensive and take time.

As to classroom observations, how can we ensure they will be reliable when everyone agrees we’ve been failing at this for generations? Administrators are facing budget cuts, while more and more demands are being made on their time. Observations will require an enormous effort in time and money at a time when costs are rising and budgets are subject to a 2 percent cap.

While the benefits of high-stakes evaluation have yet to be demonstrated, the negative effects are well-known. Teaching to the test, and even cheating, has taken place in some districts in the United States.

Students should have the best teachers possible. Firing teachers based on two years of test scores and observations will not achieve that goal. On the contrary, the Ruiz approach would subject teachers to political interference and arbitrary judgments, and deliver a crushing blow to teacher morale at a time when it’s already low. To improve our teacher workforce, we need to attract capable educators to the field and train and support them, not drive them away. We can’t fire our way to better teachers any more than a sports team can improve its roster by cutting players.

We should improve our teacher evaluation system, but instead of using evaluations to fire teachers, let’s use them as a tool for teachers to improve their practice. Give new teachers more time and support to learn their craft, and give districts four or even five years to decide whether to grant tenure. Streamline the tenure removal process so it’s prompt and efficient, and give administrators the resources they need to be thorough and fair in training and evaluating staff.

It will not be easy to get teacher evaluation right. Already, the schedule for New Jersey’s new evaluation system has been pushed back twice. Shouldn’t we make sure the system works before tying it to high-stakes career decisions?

Bruce Taterka is lead teacher of science and technology at West Morris Mendham High School. He is a member of the state Department of Education Evaluation Pilot Advisory Committee.